2011 Canadian Election Thread

[Parallex]

Hey a topical story in the Globe. On Planes...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1971274/

The plan to buy F-35 Joint Strike Fighters will cost billions more than the $29-billion estimated by Canada’s budget watchdog, a U.S. defence spending analyst says.

“It’s going to be significantly more. It’s not going to be $1-billion more, it’s going to be significantly more,” said Winslow Wheeler, a defence-spending watchdog with the Washington-based Center for Defense Information.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Just to drive the point home of how ridiculous your claim of this is.

7 days ago....




That damn Ignatieff and his extreme right wing ideology.

http://carolynbennett.liberal.ca/new...rvative-waste/

Hahaha well done!

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Slava

^ I was giving credit to them, totally. I don't think that they actually campaigned on it at all though, and as I recall it just showed up in the budget one day? I think its a great idea and I'd just like to see more ideas in general rather than the tired same old, same old.

On a bit of a non-partisan point here is what the parties should be talking about: http://www.financialpost.com/news/Ca...389/story.html

We all know that this is coming, but no one is addressing this at all.

I just don't understand how you can link to an article like that, outlining how terribly in debt we actually are, and then go back and support a party wanting to add billions upon billions of NEW spending to our budget.

If anything, we should be voting for a party cutting services, privatizing everything they can, and reducing spending as much as possible to attempt to retain the best and most important parts of the public service.

If this continual bribing of Canadians with our own money proceeds into the future, eventually one day we will be like Greece and have our debt pulled; and suddenly there will just be no more pensions, no more healthcare, no more EI. Nobody will be joking about a national day care program, gun registries, or fitness tax credits.

Why does it take a watershed moment for people to realize that money doesn't just grow on trees and we can't afford what we already have.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I just don't understand how you can link to an article like that, outlining how terribly in debt we actually are, and then go back and support a party wanting to add billions upon billions of NEW spending to our budget.

Because every party is campaigning on new spending (or other revenue depleting policies depending on how you define "spending"). Show me one political party that's campaigning on quick deficit elimination (Hint: There are none), Show me a major party that isn't saying they'll reduce the deficit in due time (Hint: They all are).

Ultimately the political parties are all spending money (roughly the same amount considering their deficit projections) so functionally the choice just comes down to what they choose to spend it on.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I just don't understand how you can link to an article like that, outlining how terribly in debt we actually are, and then go back and support a party wanting to add billions upon billions of NEW spending to our budget.

If anything, we should be voting for a party cutting services, privatizing everything they can, and reducing spending as much as possible to attempt to retain the best and most important parts of the public service.

If this continual bribing of Canadians with our own money proceeds into the future, eventually one day we will be like Greece and have our debt pulled; and suddenly there will just be no more pensions, no more healthcare, no more EI. Nobody will be joking about a national day care program, gun registries, or fitness tax credits.

Why does it take a watershed moment for people to realize that money doesn't just grow on trees and we can't afford what we already have.

Right and like I've already said in this thread I'm undecided and not particularly enamoured with any of the parties and their platforms.

Reality is that people only seem to talk about the CPC here though and take shots at the Liberals and NDP. I suppose they have a monopoly of worthwhile ideas?

Forgive me if you think this is misguided, but I don't have faith that the CPC and their band of convicted fraudsters will be able to sort out the issues with the aging population any better than the others. They've offered me no reason to think otherwise as a continual "Liberals/NDP is bad" campaign doesn't give me that hope either.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Because every party is campaigning on new spending or other revenue depleting policies. Show me one political party that's campaigning on quick deficit elimination (Hint: There are none), Show me a major party that isn't saying they'll reduce the deficit in due time (Hint they all are).

Ultimately the political parties are all spending money (roughly the same amount considering their deficit projections) so functionally the choice just comes down to what they choose to spend it on.

Welcome to election 101 my friend.

A platform based around debt reduction is not sexy or vote grabbing in this country. Damnit the Rubes want to be taken care of, from the cradle to the grave the government must give me more and more and more because damnit I've earned it.

So you run an election on hyped social programs. Don't worry don't work for a year . . .we've gotcha back mang. You have kids, we have money for you. Its just so damn unfair that you have to pay tuition. Oh hey look Quebec is upset about the HST, don't worry . . super government to the resuce here's several bags of delicious beaver bucks to get you by.

All the parties engage in vote buying, holy crap Quebecs a little weak voter wise, here ya go fella. Oh we should target angry students, they'll vote for us if they're not too busy sucking back cans of Keyston Light and chewing on bong water.

None of the parties are going to ever advocate debt reduction, its totally boring and not sexy enough in the polls.

All I ave to say is

What about me?
What about the Captain.

[Azure]

You pay down the debt and deficit in the good years, not in the years of recovery.

Right now the government should be concerned with driving growth in the economy and getting the private sector to spend the billions they're all sitting on. Eliminating wasteful spending is ALWAYS going to be a problem with any government, no matter if its Conservative or Liberal.

The Conservatives have done a decent job the past few years which is reason enough for me to vote for them again. That being said, if the Liberals didn't have a tool for a leader, I would listen to what they have to say.

It actually scares me that both parties are throwing money around in the form of promises to try and 'buy' votes. Right now we should be talking about less spending, and not throwing billions into a child care program, which at the very least is the stupidest thing to have been said since the election campaign began. Plain and simple the Liberals are complete and utter morons for thinking they can efficiently run a child care plan without throwing billions away. No social program run by the government is run efficiently. Regretfully in order to have a health care plan that covers everyone, I do believe in the need for a universal program, partly run by the government. But child care? The tax credit is a much better idea.

[IliketoPuck]

Do you refer to yourself in your everyday life in the third person as "the Captain"



Put that into an election platform as your main point and I will vote for you. It is better than voting for the Liberals or NDP

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Right and like I've already said in this thread I'm undecided and not particularly enamoured with any of the parties and their platforms.

So would you be willing to do a one time vote to declare me as your belevolent dictator for life? I promise, no more of these pesky elections. There's even a job for you in my ministry of justice and order.

Originally Posted by Slava

Reality is that people only seem to talk about the CPC here though and take shots at the Liberals and NDP. I suppose they have a monopoly of worthwhile ideas?

I've seen plenty of shots going either way on this board, I was actually fairly pleased that things seemed to be fairly balanced on CalgaryPuck considering that it is a Calgary based website.

Originally Posted by Slava

Forgive me if you think this is misguided, but I don't have faith that the CPC and their band of convicted fraudsters will be able to sort out the issues with the aging population any better than the others. They've offered me no reason to think otherwise as a continual "Liberals/NDP is bad" campaign doesn't give me that hope either.

I'll counter that, by stating that this is truly not an election based on long term planning. I also think cynically that what Michael Ignatieff is proposing is not long term planning, but a trip to the past where he's pulling out old Liberal and NDP ideas, and Its the wrong message for this election.

Harper hasn't run a great campaign to me, but Ignatieff has truly failed to take advantage of it, these programs really smell of Bob Rae and the more powerful but socialist elite in the Liberal party.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Do you refer to yourself in your everyday life in the third person as "the Captain"

Put that into an election platform as your main point and I will vote for you. It is better than voting for the Liberals or NDP

Only when I'm really drunk.

I've always said that I'd love to run in a federal election, but my hookers and blow prior life would probably doom me, that and I'm advocating the violent overthrow of democracy and the destruction of the Jedi Order.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Slava

Right and like I've already said in this thread I'm undecided and not particularly enamoured with any of the parties and their platforms.

Reality is that people only seem to talk about the CPC here though and take shots at the Liberals and NDP. I suppose they have a monopoly of worthwhile ideas?

Forgive me if you think this is misguided, but I don't have faith that the CPC and their band of convicted fraudsters will be able to sort out the issues with the aging population any better than the others. They've offered me no reason to think otherwise as a continual "Liberals/NDP is bad" campaign doesn't give me that hope either.

I guess so, but I really think it is quite obvious which party leans towards fiscal responsibility.

Don't forget that following winning the previous election, the Conservatives tabled a much smaller budget which would have had Canada in far less debt before the coalition of losers tried to sneak in the back door to power. Which led us to the current high debt levels and it certainly is arguable how effective the deficit spending was.

In the Current election, only one party is talking about reserving any massive new spending until the budget is balanced. Only one party is talking about job creation and attracting new investment to Canada. Outside of loan guarantees to Newfoundland and a veiled reference to settling Quebec's HST dispute, what new big budget items have the Conservatives promised that they hadn't already delivered in the March budget?

[getbak]

Despite Ignatieff having what most consider to be a good week on the campaign trail, and Harper not doing much of anything, the Conservatives have widened their lead in the polls from 38.6% last week to 42.3% this week (Nanos Research): http://www.calgaryherald.com/Week+po...121/story.html


Also, no Green in the debates: http://www.calgaryherald.com/Federal...102/story.html

[Slava]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I guess so, but I really think it is quite obvious which party leans towards fiscal responsibility.

Don't forget that following winning the previous election, the Conservatives tabled a much smaller budget which would have had Canada in far less debt before the coalition of losers tried to sneak in the back door to power. Which led us to the current high debt levels and it certainly is arguable how effective the deficit spending was.

In the Current election, only one party is talking about reserving any massive new spending until the budget is balanced. Only one party is talking about job creation and attracting new investment to Canada. Outside of loan guarantees to Newfoundland and a veiled reference to settling Quebec's HST dispute, what new big budget items have the Conservatives promised that they hadn't already delivered in the March budget?

A) That coaltion budget was totally necessary and given the outcome and the fact that the CPC went around for 2 years advertising all of the spending I'd say that they were onside, at least for the photo-ops?

B) what veiled reference? Its plain as day, $2.2 Billion.

C) Only one party is currently having issues with other scandals such as people in the PMO with FIVE prior fraud convictions. Only one party has altered documents to deny funding after they were signed and only one party has prorogued parliament not once, but twice!

Its really not an easy decision for an undecided. Do I believe everything that the Liberals are saying? No. But do I think that with this kind of screwball governance we have now that they deserve another shot? Not particularly either.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

In the Current election, only one party is talking about reserving any massive new spending until the budget is balanced.

Since you're obviously talking about the Tories I would counter that their planning on spending aplenty.

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Outside of loan guarantees to Newfoundland and a veiled reference to settling Quebec's HST dispute, what new big budget items have the Conservatives promised that they hadn't already delivered in the March budget?

Why should their Budget somehow be exempt from discussion? It's essentually their Platform and in it they're planning on spending a tonne. That loan guarantee and the Billlion Dollar handout to Quebec aren't even mentioned in their budget (and therefor nor are they costed into it). I'm still waiting for PMSH to say where that dough is gonna come from.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Slava

Reality is that people only seem to talk about the CPC here though and take shots at the Liberals and NDP. I suppose they have a monopoly of worthwhile ideas?

Nobody's political preference is right or wrong. Everyone has different values and priorities. You have to respect that in a Democracy.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Slava

A) That coaltion budget was totally necessary and given the outcome and the fact that the CPC went around for 2 years advertising all of the spending I'd say that they were onside, at least for the photo-ops?

Totally necessary by who's opinion? I really wish the Coalition of losers had never tried to sneak into power and we could have seen an example of what kind of effect a much smaller stimulus package had. Most economists agree they are just totally inneffectual and certainly Canada's (even after raising it) was smaller than many countries and yet we still weathered the storm better than most countries.

Based upon the article you linked to, I would have said what is necessary is reducing debt and spending in order to preserve CPP and Health Care into the future. But for the most part that decision has already been made and drastic changes will be forced upon all of us as there isn't much left in the kitty.

B) what veiled reference? Its plain as day, $2.2 Billion.

Where do you find a singed agreement indicating the amount? All I have read is the Conservatives have promised to end the dispute and will pay somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 billion?

C) Only one party is currently having issues with other scandals such as people in the PMO with FIVE prior fraud convictions. Only one party has altered documents to deny funding after they were signed and only one party has prorogued parliament not once, but twice!

Its really not an easy decision for an undecided. Do I believe everything that the Liberals are saying? No. But do I think that with this kind of screwball governance we have now that they deserve another shot? Not particularly either.

I'm sorry but this viewpoint seems to be rather deviod of any historical context. The Federal Liberal party had several members who were CONVICTED of FRAUD while IN OFFICE last time they were in power. I mean, this wasn't hiring of some lower level bureaucrat whose security check went awry, this was criminal activity from the very top of the government! To try and paint the conservatives as the party lacking ethics is just mindboggling to the highest degree.

No Prime Minister in history Prorogued Parliament more than Jean Cretien. And certainly prorogation is nothing new in Canadian politics, it is rather common. When Stephen Harper progrogued parliament his popularity was never higher, so he clearly was acting in the interests of Canadians like never before.

I just don't see any traction in these arguments whatsoever.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Since you're obviously talking about the Tories I would counter that their planning on spending aplenty.

Sure they are, far too much. But also clearly much less than any other party.

Why should their Budget somehow be exempt from discussion? It's essentually their Platform and in it they're planning on spending a tonne. That loan guarantee and the Billlion Dollar handout to Quebec aren't even mentioned in their budget (and therefor nor are they costed into it). I'm still waiting for PMSH to say where that dough is gonna come from.

Yup like I mentioned I can only think of two things the Conservatives haven't already costed out. Unlike the Liberals who have promised upwards of 10 billion in new spending, and without mentioning how they are going to pay for it. Jack Mintz shredded any credibility the Liberals have in stating that raising corproate tax rates will actually pay for their promises; it likely will only increase our current deficit and lower employment drastically (this is confirmed by the PBO, and dept of finance).

Any other promises the Cons have made are at least only after we have returned to a balanced budget. And while I don't like new spending at all, attempting some semblance of fiscal sanity has to earn points if you truly believe health care and CPP are worth trying to keep in the next decade or so.

[simonsays]

I'm finding this election fairly difficult to find someone to vote for. On the one hand we have a PM who is campaigning on:

1) Those other guys are like an evil Voltron. If you let them assemble they will become unstoppable.
2) Once we have our unicorn breeding program fully functioning...free skittles for everyone.
3) We haven't hit an iceberg yet.

Which would be entirely enough for me to vote against him if his chief opponent wasn't running on a campaign of:
1) You don't know how to spend your own money, we do. Give it to us and we'll spend it for you.
2) The other guy is an a$$hole.

On the one hand I have no interest in paying for national daycare. In fact the liberals almost had my vote before they showed me what was behind door number 2. But on the other hand I don't understand what is so fundamentally wrong with our economy that we need to reduce corporate taxes by 12%.

[WilsonFourTwo]

Apparently the Green Party's legal challenge to join the debate has been turned down.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1971474/

I remember the uproar about this last time, but nobody really seems to give a damn this time around. Am I misreading the situation?

To be honest, I don't really like the idea of a media coalition deciding who gets to participate, but so long as the "You have a seat, you get a seat" rule is applied equitably from this point on, fine by me.

I would also like to mention May's performance (re: the debate issue) has been pretty terrible. She comes off as a petulant child, not a major party leader.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Yup like I mentioned I can only think of two things the Conservatives haven't already costed out.

So? Just because they're costed out (to a deficit) doesn't mean that it's not massive spending.

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Unlike the Liberals who have promised upwards of 10 billion in new spending, and without mentioning how they are going to pay for it.

8.2B actually... and they did say how they are going to pay for it. You may not like how they intend to pay for it but that doesn't mean that they didn't cost it out. Which is more then Harpers done on what few non-budget promises (that don't take effect until 2015/16... maybe) that he's released. Surprise surprise... the former President and CEO of a Right-Wing think tank's opinion comes out on the side of the right-wing party. He didn't "shred" any credibility unless you were already predisposed to disbelieve it to begin with. I could just as easily point towards the opinions of Jim Stanford or other economists of his ilk regarding corporate taxes but they're no more credible then Mintz.